I remain unconvinced of the safety of these rockets. Sounds like they are feasible, but when someone glosses over things and makes other things seem insignificant which are not, then I get a bit paranoid about the snake oil I'm being sold.
For instance "To put it into perspective, all of the radioactive nuclides that were released by Chernobyl were also about 10 pounds worth. That's all. Just ten pounds was enough to kill nearly 40 people and generate a terrible panic among hundreds of thousands of others. "
My church used to look after the children from near Chernobyl. All of them used to come out to Australia for a few months for a holiday, because they were all gravely ill from radiation poisoning. (Some at the time were going to die from it.) Most will suffer for the rest of their lives from the effects of the radiation (as will many of the adults who were in and around the area - the same as those who survived Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the are still receiving payments from the Japanese Government). To have the article be-little their plight and pretend it was a "panic" is rather inhumane. (Unless of course the article is ignoring these people all together and the 'panic' refered to was in the rest of the world.)
Then another bit which states:" Enough of the unjustified nuclear paranoia of the last three decades has infected the government that they desire to be insanely cautious. ", is also belittling the concerns people have over these sorts of things. People have a right to question and be concerned about nuclear use, whenever it comes up. I hope any government which uses Nuclear power or rockets are cautious. Even if it appears INSANELY so. I'd rather they account for everything they possibly can, rather than hope that nothing will go wrong. After all, that's what got people paranoid about Nuclear energy to begin with. Many accidents, and many deaths.
As someone who did Atomic Physics at University, I know the Nuclear community like to down play the danger involved. (And those opposed like to pretend that any form of nuclear use is evil - hope they never get X-Rays).
A more balanced view might have helped to keep things in perspective, but the article is written by someone who sounds like they want to play with dynamite and aren't allowed to.
I am sure a safe nuclear reactor can be built one day, but to this day I haven't heard of any being built. (The pebble bad reactors do not have the squeaky clean record some people make them out to have. Such as the incident at Hamm-Uentrop West Germany nine days after the Chernobyl accident. On May 4 1986, a pebble became lodged in a feeder tube. Operators subsequently caused damage to the fuel during attempts to free the pebble. Radiation was released to the environs. The West German government closed down the research program because they found the reactor design unsafe).
In the case of this rocket, my immediate concerns are Human error & Programming error (such as a missing comma in the Arianne 5 Rocket Failure). In the right place, a programming error which shuts down all systems during flight could cause these mobile nuclear devices to plummet to earth. (It's happened on planes before... even with their in built error checking systems some planes have lost all systems) Imagine it plummetting towards a major population centre. (And you can't press the destruct button, because ALL the systems shutdown). Or worse still, it's plummeting to earth over a population centre, and you can't press destruct, because it would release the radiation over them.
I know the article is talking about them lifting off from the middle of the Pacific... but rockets don't stay over the pacific for the duration of their flight.
Also, if these rockets are so safe, why are they not building reactors based on their design to use on earth? Keeping the nuclear engine in a remote place on earth sounds a better idea than having one roaming the orbi
I have four PC's at present. They all shipped with some form of MS product on them.
My latest runs XP.
My previous ran NT, but I changed to RedHat Linux 9.
The previous one to that ran NT too, but now runs whatever I chuck on there (sometimes Mandrake, sometimes other free distros... depends what I am trying out at the time. I havea multitude of OS's to run on it).
The oldest machine runs Win98.
The Intel machines I owned before this either came with Win3.0, Win NT, or MS DOS, and all at some time were removed to run Red Hat in some shape or form.
So, 50% of my machines have had MS OS's replaced with other OS's. And 100% of my previous Intel machines all had MS OS's removed to run something else. I bet the report doesn't take that into account. It's very biased into thinking everyone wants MS OS's and doesn't take into account that some of us swapped out MS products to run Linux or other OS's. I am not the only person I know who has done this either.
The only two machines I ever bought which didn't come with MS OS's on them, were my old Vic20 and Commodore64. [Which might show my age!:-)]
The Pope is reminded that the Church cannot have another "Galileo incident," science's first "martyr." Galileo presented his correct heliocentric views to the Church, and the Church clung onto dogmatic tradition -- incorrect scientific views.
Also note, it was Copernicus's heliocentric view that Galileo was presenting. Copernicus was an Orthodox Monk - so the Orthodox church at the time did not have a problem with the 'Heliocentric' view of the Universe. It was Catholic Doctrine and not the Bible which stated that the sun went around the Earth.
Galileo refered to himself as being a Copernican when stating his belief. The Catholic Churches beliefs at the time, were not based on the Bible, but upon the teachings of Aristole and Ptolomy. All part of the 'Renaisance' as the 're-birth' of knowledge once lost was re-found by the Western-world.
Another thing to note, was that the writing which Galileo used to present his view was in the form of two people having a discussion. He made the mistake of using something the Pope had said to him in a discussion as part of the arguement of the 'Sun revolves around the Earth' view. The character making the arguement was given an name equivalent of 'Ignoramus'. Something the Pope and Catholic Church at the time considered rather insulting. {And wouldn't we all if our words were put in the mouth of an ignoramus and used against us.}
Even Fundamentalism is a relatively new thing to the Church.
I am glad you posted what you did, it was nice to see this expressed in this forum. It is something I have a hard time getting across to both athiests and Christians alike (and anyone else). As I always try to tell them, Science is about HOW the earth was made, the Bible is about WHO made the earth. Both are answering two totally different questions... those who look for the answer to the wrong question in the wrong place you will always get wrong opinions.
Those who choose to believe or not believe the bibles teachings are free to do so.
"So, maybe the article tells more than the blurb, but it would appear to me that the reason that XP crashes more is that the people who are running it could be partly at fault (ie worms, trojans, poor hardware choices with outdated drivers)."
Maybe you just haven't hit the bugs in XP. My XP crashes quite often. I have no trojans, no worms or any such thing on my machine, I run anti-virus software and have a firewall. I don't play around with the registeres or anything. I also have all the up to date drivers for everything, and I have the best hardware which was available. SO blaming the user is a cop out, when the OS has known bugs. All you need to do is do something which will cause the OS to hit that bug, and you'll get your machine to freeze.
I have to admit though, it has a lot less problems than when I was using Win95 and Win98.
Remember, Win95 shipped with half a million known bugs. Well, when I first tried loading it on my old machine, I must have hit one of those, because first time it ran, it told me to shutdown everything because there was a problem. When I phoned Microsoft, they first tried to blame me saying it had illegal software on the machine...
Nope, only Win95 ..nothing else.
Oh, then you've got a virus.
You ship Win95 with viruses in it?
Then it's your hardware, Win95 can only run on the most expensive hardware, you have to go and buy a better machine.
WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!
Needless to say, when I eventually ran Linux on my old machine, it never crashed. So what does that say about the hardware on my machine? Win95 can't cope, but Linux can easily?
In fact, the first machine I ran Linux on, only crashed once and that ws after I had run it for four years.
I got over the problems with Win95 always crashing every time I used the machine when I eventually upgraded to Win98. It only crashed occassionally, but always at inappropriate moments. If the hardware really was the problem, then Win98 wouldn't have solved the issues because the hardware was getting older, and the drivers would have been more out of date. The Microsoft help desk couldn't fix the Win95 problem, eventually conceding that everything was set up correctly, and that I had hit some bug in the OS.
XP has operated far better than either of the old WIn95 and Win98, but my two Linux machines have run rings around them and the XP machine in terms of stability.
Of course, it's a matter of horses for courses. I have the Win machines (XP and 98 at present) because I need them for all things WIn related, and I have the Linux machines for all things Linux related.
Just because you haven't hit a known bug, isn't a good enough reason to blame the user, or the users hardware.
" I just spent a half an hour trying to find Moe's...
For those interested, it's in between 'Springfild Town Hall' and 'Springfild Junior High School'.:)"
Of course it is. Close enough to keep politicians circulatory systems functioning, and near enough to catch those teens with fake ID's valuable disposable income.:-)
Can you think of two more needy groups... other than University Students?
" Or, say I read 10 studies on how many shooting deaths there are in a year in various nations. For Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia, the UK, etc. I chose the lowest number out of all 10, and for the USA, I chose the highest number. All the numbers are "Facts" but its ethically wrong to pick and chose different studies."
Most places I have read where they quote STATISTICS on shooting deaths, they do NOT use studies. They use the figures from each nations Bureau of Statistics which keep accurate records of Shooting deaths and wounded each year. Governemnts are good like that. If you are going around reading STUDIES, I'd like to know who is doing these studies, when the facts are KNOWN and easy to get hold off from each Government.
Everytime I've seen the statistics of people shot per capita compared to people who own guns, the same thing becomes relevant. The greater the percentage of gun ownership in society, the greater percentage chance of people who get shot by guns.
As for people exagerating to make a point, I saw four months of propaganda by Bush, Blair and Howard before the war, with the media having a distinct slant towards the war (good for ratings probably), and a distinct lack of coverage of the Anti-war rallies. With little or no coverage of actual facts.
Moore probably thinks he is helping by exagerating towards the liberal views in his documentaries in order to counteract the obvious slant most of the media of the world have towards conservatives. After all, the media is run by rich men who want to remain rich by keeping conservatives in power who they can make even more money and get more power.
Meanwhile in Japan, the US has convinced Koizumi and others to change the Japanese constitution. The constitution at present doesn't allow Japan to declare war on any one who does not attack them. This was put into their constitution to stop a repeat of Peral Harbour and the like. Now that Japan wants a seat on the UN Security Council, Colin Powell has told them they MUST change their constitution so they CAN declare war on other nations.
Most Japanese think this is a step backwards from their Anti-war stance. The lawmakers in Japan though are hoping Koizumi will get it throough, as they want that seat on the Security Council.
How nice it would have been to have had a nation who had turned it's back on war on the Security Council in order to make sure ALL diplomatic means had been tried before a declaration by the UN to take out another country.
But, I digressed from the original intent of my post... so much happening on SlashDot concerning this.:-)
I don't know what country you're from, but around here, multimillionaire corporate executives are not in the habit of buying groceries at the corner store, shopping with the plebeians at Wal-Mart, or hunkering down in a common park. They buy foreign cars, shop at expensive boutiques, and summer in Europe. In short, they very much tend to horde the majority of their money, and spend the rest of it in highly rarefied set of shops that mostly allow their wealth to circulate amongst their fellow millionaires.
Actually, Senjutsu, it is worse than you think. Most Millionaires (in Japan... I am assuming you are from Japan from your name), and in most countries of the world, actually live very normal lives compared with the rest of us. [ie not much different to us]
Refer to article in the Japan Times. English versionfor our US, English, Aussie, NZ friends etc.
Millionaires don't live up to glamorous image
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5 ?nn20040817f1.htm
What this really means, is more money in the pockets of Nike exec's who will then use it in their investment portfolios investing in more companies who are moving jobs OS, and doing the Lower to Middle class of the First World out of their jobs, while 3rd world workers slave away in sweat shops under pretty bad conditions.
The only winners out of this... Rich people.
So, you are correct in the fact that the 'trickle-down' theory doesn't work.. because the main emphasis is on the 'TRICK'. If the lower and middle class people think eventually they will get a piece of the pie, they will not stop it happening... thus putting themselves out of work.
The real trick is to try to get 3rd world working conditions up to the same standard as 1st world conditions. Then countries can compete on a more even footing, as the labour conditions will be the same, the cost will eventually even out (EVENTUALLY), and the real competition will take place in building a better product. (With the exception of numerous marketing tricks to make you assume you are buying a better product).
In the meantime, more of us will become unemployed, and the only trickling will be the rich b@$t@rd$ trickling on us!
I'm willing to bet that they're really aliens created by future guy to slow down human development!
So, they aren't aliens invented by Comic book guy then?
Watashi ha Niigata ben ga hanasemasen.
Alright, now a whole new generation can get frustrated and give up on this game before making it a tenth of the way through.
The new generation will go to a cheat site, get all the info on what they need to do to get through it. Then finish it before we can work out the Bistromathics of how it's done.
Only way to stop them is to play a Snooglehoort at them, in the hope they will run away, or get the Circling Poets of Arium to throw stones at them.
The only manager I worked under who was any good, the provebial "enlightened manager", had risen from the geek ranks. However, he was pretty much trained to be a good manager. He had previously worked for EDS who invested a heap of cash in his management training, and it really paid off.
Other managers I know who rose up from the geek ranks, usually lack the people skills to actually be effective managers. Quite often they think they know technology so well, that they also can't see past their own ego.
The worst IT managers though, were the ones who had no idea about technology, and constantly made major faux pas almost every day due to their lack of understanding of what was realy needed. Their interpersonal skills also deteriorated. When they first start in IT management, they have the people skills, but as their stupid ideas get more and more resistance, they begin to feel that there is some sort of mutiny on and become rigid dictators who threaten people with sackings if they do not perform their stupid requests.
I've seen these sorts of managers ruin entire IT departments. Especially if they have come from accounting backgrounds, where they only care about the bottom line, and ignore people and good work practices in order to get things done.
The last place I worked, they removed the IT manager who had come from a geek background, because he opposed them for attempting illegal shortcuts (like removing security). He was replaced by an accountant who used to demand the other managers be 'yes men' to whatever ideas were past down from above.
The last straw for me was when they asked me to set it up so that they could send scanned checks with peoples bank details across the internet UNENCRYPTED. Quite illegal, and quite stoooopid. It resulted in a nasty battle with lawyers and HR involved, and the company was forced to give in.
This was in spite of the fact, that we had a private WAN which sent those scanned checks for free... and some accountant thought it would save money to send them via the internet which actualyl costs us fees to up-load and down-load what they wanted to send. No matter how many times we tried to tell management it was MORE EXPENSIVE to send stuff over the internet, they refused to believe it cost money, because they thought the internet was some big Free thing that everyone on the planet could connect to without cost.
So, it would be nice to see more geeks get into management, but only after they have had extensive traininh in managing people OR if they grab the manager from outside of IT, they need to ensure they get a good understanding of what IT is, and how it works.
Another good example of where non-IT managers fell down, was when I was a System Admin. Manaement insisted I give the root password to two guys who didn't need it, just because they convinced management that they couldn't do their jobs without it. Management couldn't explain to me why these guys couldn't do their jobs without it, but I still had to inform them whenever I changed the root password, or else I was going to get sacked. I was so glad whenI moved positions, because the security for those machines was impossible. One of those idiots blew away the i-node to the password file when he was trying to hack peoples passwords. The idiot. That was a tough day for me.. but do you think management would take the root password off tem after that? Nope!
It's cool. That's why I started the last post with ROFL. No offense was taken.:-)
I thought you were just rehashing a common myth that networking was as easy as plugging two computers together.
We had one of the PC support people worked with us once for a month on some cross training. (ie we taught him some about what we actually did). He used to put us down before he did the training. After that, he admitted it was a hard job, and he was actually helpful for about three months before falling back into his old ways.:-)
Hopefully in IT all those "I want $80k for being able to plug two computers together" networking people will get weeded out.
ROFL. I was a network engineer for 3.5 years. It's more difficult than it looks, and you get blamed for everything... but hey, that's what the inferno of torment (IT) is all about.:-) Last place I was at wasn't paying me much more than $30K while one of the PC support guys was getting about $50 for sitting around all day. I could bore you with the war stories of what really happens in Networking, but you'd probably retaliate with semiconductor war stories.:-)
Dunlop have always been a good cheap shoe to buy. They haven't changed too much in price (except to go up a little in the last ten years), so cheap shoes are still there. I targeted Nike specifically because I know they use the sweathouses and the price doesn't reflect the cost of production. The savings are not passed on, their shoes did not come down. [And other brands followed Nike by increasing thier prices... so shoes on average went up.]
Hmmm Okay, a slight fall of 2-5% in software... but still my point about the profit margin still stands.
I wonder if the price of the software came down because of competition, rather than it being cheaper to make? If it was because it was cheaper to make, the consumer certainly didn't get the full 90% saving the company did.
If the software houses decide to follow Microsoft (like the majority of shoe manufacturers did with Nike), then they may UP their price later. [I know when the shoe manufacturers followed Nike's lead, their shoes were suddenly considered 'better quality' and trendy. I was told off for wearing Dunlops, whose shoes remained at a resonable price - as opposed to Rebok or Nike's whose shoes last just as long, but cost three to four times the price].
Getting back to the software though - When we outsourced a project to India, it cost us $900,000 as compared to $9 Million it was going to cost to develop in house. I know we didn't lower our price when selling it. If other software houses are making the same saving, by producing thier software for one-tenth the price in India, then the 2-5% reduction means they are still improving their profit a LOT.
But, like I said in the first post, 50% of the IT jobs were wiped out here, and only 10 to 15% of those people will get back into IT. It wasn't just the poor suckers who didn't know what they were doing that got axed too (though most of them were first to go). A lot of the good workers also lost their jobs, just simply because their jobs went OS.
Every now and then I hear stories that the markets will return one day, because I hear about mistakes from Indian companies. (The software we got them to write didn't work at all to begin with. We had to have them re-write it). But I can only see India improving and not seeing the market return.
But, I do work in a city which took a major blow in the IT sector and had the corporate offices move elsewhere in the country as well. So now we only have regional offices. This cities IT sector won't recover for a long time.
I still think it is false logic to think that one thing will follow another, just because it looks good. Shoes certainly didn't. Cheap shoes were always around, and probably always will be, but the market as a whole went UP and did not come down. [Not that I really want to have sweatshops set up here.]
But, the overall cost of manufacture of software has decreased a lot, and the price has reduced slightly. I doubt the bounce will occur to the IT industry which is expected, because the market is already saturated (and in a lot of cases with freeware which does the job).
In the 1980's I read a book on building your own Electric car, which basically cost US$1000 at the time. In the late 80's (or was it early '90s) I remembered GM said they couldn't build an electric car for less than US$100,000, which made me laugh. They used it as an excuse for scraping an electric car they were planning on building. (The good old, "We tried, but we can't do it for your own good" excuse most companies give when they really don't want to do something).
Well, the other excuse I've heard about Hydrogen fueled cars, is there isn't anywhere to build places to buy hydrogen from... when I suggested to ppl that maybe the good old petrol station shoudl branch into hydrogen, they said it costs to much to install somewhere to store the hydrogen. How weird I thought, considering they had no problems when they wanted to sell LPG or needed to sell Unleaded Petrol.
Personally, I am getting tired of car manufactureres, and petrol companies always finding excuses why we need to stick to petroleum based products when peopl ehave made alternative fueled vehicles for ages without the high costs or problems obtaining the fuel. It only becomes 'difficult' or 'a problem' when the current incumbants of the industry find they need to do something about it.
Nanni-mo hoshii mono-ga nai!!!
Not that the octopus example helps me... octopus / octopuses. But now consider:
Mouse / Mice? House / Houses?!? Hice!
Foot / feet? Tooth / Teeth? Boot / boots?!? beet!
English is made from several different langauges. The plurals come from the languages we stole the word from. Considering their are CELTIC, GERMANIC, FRENCH, LATIN, GREEK and numerous other languges chucked into creating English, it is no wonder that our gramma is screwed. After all... Run and Ran come from the Germanic.. the middle letter changes acording to the tense (I run -present tense. I ran - past tense). But other things use the 'ed' suffix to show past tense. So if we follow your rule about chucking things which don't follow the normal rule, will we be sanging ranned in the future? I ranned away!
As for the Octopuses and Octopii thing, as I recall, the English teachers used to correct people who used Octopuses. So becareful what you correct, unless you accidentaly sit on some cactuses and cactii while shearing some sheeps and sheep.
Next time you have a beef [old French for Cow], don't have a cow [Ancient CEltic from the word Coe... for cow].
You're assuming that there are new products to be made which can be sold.
Software is already a saturated market. Besides, we have been outsourcing to India for almost a decade now, and I haven't seen software decrease in price at all, we are still charged the same or more while the fat cats who own the software companies have just inceased their profit.
Guess what, no new IT jods for anyone... and while we're all waiting for the jobs to pick-up... they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
But guess what, the management and support of some software has left he shores for India and the third world too. Which really only leaves a few IT jobs left, and they aren't being shared around. In this city, 50% of the IT professionals lost their jobs to outsourcing, and it hasn't picked up. I spoke to a guy recently at a job interview, and he told me the IT job agencies expect about 10-15% of those who lost their jobs will be able to get IT jobs again, and the other 85-90% will need to find jobs in other fields. [Don't ask me where the IT agencies get their figures from].
After all, this false logic which says the software prices will fall, is like expecting Nike prices to fall just because they are made for $1 in Indonesian and Thai sweathouse factories. Prices of shoes never came down, and I doubt prices of software will either. [Well, they haven't over the last 10 years that we've been outsourcing].
Guess where that leaves us IT geeks. Either looking for work in India or looking for work as manure shovellers as it's the only work left. So damn glad I study so hard at University to get a job shovelling manure!
I have no problems with people overseas making money, after all, those IT geeks in India studied hard too. But I do take exception to being lied to about what will happen. When I was at school in the 80's, they claimed IT was going to be the place to make a decent wage. I am still waiting for that to happen, but with the downturn in IT over the last few years, I doubt I will be in IT for much longer.
This seems like common sense. Shouldn't all network admins be doing this anyway?
As someone who has worked as both a Network Engineer and a System Administrator, I can tell you that Management and common sense do not go together. Many a time we asked for tools and software to help stop the hackers, but management refused under the grounds that they thought "security through obscurity" would work. They figured no one would hack into us. When we did testing and found holes in the security that script kiddies could waltz through, Management thought we were making the holes and told us not to test.
Easy solution is to buy the book and repeatedly beat management over the head with the thing till they understand that security is important and that "security through obscurity" doesn't work. But, management do have thick heads, and it might take a long time of beating before they get it into their brain... if it ever goes in.
Common sense... yes... but what to do about management. [and if someone does hack in... guess who would have got the blame!] I think most network people like to do these common sense security things... it's management who blocks us, or refuses to allocate funds that are the real problem. [Just after I left the last place I worked, the Network Manager who took over ran the network with no firewall between the business LAN/WAN and the internet for two months. Is he dumb.. or is he just plain stooopid? Maybe he should run for President!]
Gostev said that the information on the attack could be found on "specialist web sites" although at the time of going to press the INQ couldn't find them.
I think the terrorists attacked their own sites - that's why they were down. So they were correct, part of the internet was taken down by them.
Website no higeki!
I can't wait until your first person shooter stops and drinks a nice cold refreshing soda
Actually, I am tired of the games which have drink machines in them, but when you take your character over to hem, they won't let your character buy anything and drink it. Thirsty work shooting monsters. They should have something for the character to wet his whistle!
MS Word is the one piece of software made by MS that's actually worth something. OpenOffice doesn't hold a candle.
It might be worth something, but it also costs money.
I assume you wrote this to make us all laugh. MS Word doesn't do everything which I need, where as Open Office can. Unless MS Word now allows you to convert documents into PDF format. (Which I do with either Open Office or Latex) Also, unless it allows me to send documents to Linux users as well as Windows users, it is quite useless. Of course, I havn't seen MS Word for Linux, where as most people I know use either Open Office on Windows or Linux. Even if someone I know has only MS Word, guess what, Open Office lets me convert it to a format they can read. I could keep writing about the things Open Office does... but I doubt you'd listen because you obviously haven't used it much.
Let's also compare the value for money side too. Hmmm, MS Word... costs me money, doesn't do what I want. Open Office... Free, and does what I want. Why would I spend money on a program which only does half of what I need done, when I can get one for free which does do what I want? Maybe you should take yourself out of the tiny box you live in and recognise that there are other people in this world, and MS doesn't meets our needs.
NASA are a bit late then. Queensland University already successfully tested a Scramjet on a missle in 2002.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2002/s635772.ht m
Or the first one in 2001 which crashed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1626448.stm
Or the latest one in May 18 2004:
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,959349 0%255E15306,00.html
Note that the firt successful ground test of a SCRAMJET was done in 1991 by Queensland University. NASA has also done tests on missles.
Even though the article may be doing the 'SCRAMJET AIRCRAFT' tests in simulation, a lot of the factual data has already been collected through actual test flights on rockets
etc. After all, isn't that one of the powers of computers, feed the data in... simulate what will happen (to the best of the data's and programs ability).
Dabido
Osaka ben ga wakara hen.
This is directed at all the posts. Not just the one I am posting after. (Except to say that the link between Chronic Fatigue and Allergies has been known for years! Are you really a practicing allergist and didn't know that?)
As a person who suffers from allergies, I know that most people like to pretend we "people with allergies", have munchausens and write a lot of us off as "mental". I know this, because people have done nasty things to me, like tease me when I run away from bees. Last time I was stung by one, my younger brother got the sting out almost immediately, but I still had my neck swell up to twice it's normal size which caused respiratory problems. But people love to write me off as a "lunatic" when bees scare me. Then there was the time one of my flatmates put seafood in my dinner to try to prove to me I was a hypocondriact.. which almost killed me.
Another allergy includes pig meat causing me to go into anaphalactic shock.
Dispite having done numerous tests which prove I am allergic to the ones mentioned above, plus cats, grass, dust et al, people still think it's all MENTAL! I learned about my allergy to beer the hard way. Had four of them in a night (over about 6 hours); ended up in hospital unconscious from internal bleeding from the stomach. (No, I didn't have ulcers at the time). My friends all thought it was a neat trick and want me to repeat it for them one day.
So, are most of us MENTAL. I think not. Maybe we do over react a bit to some things. But when we know that "thing" has the potential to kill us, of course we will do whatever it takes to avoid them. In some cases, we avoid things which we aren't allergic to out of necessity. For instance, I am a vegetarian. Am I allergic to beef or lamb? Not as far as I know, but when people think nothing of substituting meats when one isn't available, I don't want to end up dead or in hospital just because the restaurant swapped a pork chop because the lamb chop was all used up. Or someone cooked a pork chop on the BBQ before they cooked my steak.
As for smells. Not sure about computer smells, but yeah, smells make me nausious. Normally anything carbon based like petroleum/carfumes and stuff. Some perfumes in soaps etc. In fact, most soaps give me a rash, so i use a special one. Bacon cooking makes me nausious and I sometimes vomit. Not sure why, as I never eat the stuff. To everyone else it's just a smell. They can write it off as hypocondria or munchausens, but guess what, tests at the RPA (Royal Prince Alfred Hospital)allergy unit have proven that I am allergic to these things.
When I did my allergy testing, I reacted to everything on the skin test. The Dr's put this down to the fact that I was so allergic to Cats, Grass, and dust that it caused my body to react to everything. [They were the three strongest reactions on the test].
Since living in a cat free environment, some of my sinus problems have cleared. (Just need to get rid of the dust and the grass in the world, and I can breath easy.. provided I don't eat any pig, get stung by a bee.. or come into contact with anything else I react to).
After reading a lot of what other people have had to say about this, with MOST of us allergic people being "Mental" I have to disagree. Most I have met suffer from their allergies, and when people tease us about them, right us off as mental or whatever, it just shows an insensitivity towards our predicament.
Just imagine if something "normal" like food could kill you. Wouldn't you be extra cautious?
We are fortunate that we have the technology to see that certain substances do trigger our histamines and allergies now. One hundred years ago, I probably would have been dead by now. (Actually, I was lucky to survive the internal bleed from the beer. I took myself to the hospital and ten minutes after arriving my blood pressure dropped to zero [zero on the device attached to me. There must have s
Slashdot Mirror
I remain unconvinced of the safety of these rockets. Sounds like they are feasible, but when someone glosses over things and makes other things seem insignificant which are not, then I get a bit paranoid about the snake oil I'm being sold.
... even with their in built error checking systems some planes have lost all systems) Imagine it plummetting towards a major population centre. (And you can't press the destruct button, because ALL the systems shutdown). Or worse still, it's plummeting to earth over a population centre, and you can't press destruct, because it would release the radiation over them. ... but rockets don't stay over the pacific for the duration of their flight.
For instance "To put it into perspective, all of the radioactive nuclides that were released by Chernobyl were also about 10 pounds worth. That's all. Just ten pounds was enough to kill nearly 40 people and generate a terrible panic among hundreds of thousands of others. "
My church used to look after the children from near Chernobyl. All of them used to come out to Australia for a few months for a holiday, because they were all gravely ill from radiation poisoning. (Some at the time were going to die from it.) Most will suffer for the rest of their lives from the effects of the radiation (as will many of the adults who were in and around the area - the same as those who survived Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the are still receiving payments from the Japanese Government). To have the article be-little their plight and pretend it was a "panic" is rather inhumane. (Unless of course the article is ignoring these people all together and the 'panic' refered to was in the rest of the world.)
Then another bit which states:" Enough of the unjustified nuclear paranoia of the last three decades has infected the government that they desire to be insanely cautious. ", is also belittling the concerns people have over these sorts of things. People have a right to question and be concerned about nuclear use, whenever it comes up. I hope any government which uses Nuclear power or rockets are cautious. Even if it appears INSANELY so. I'd rather they account for everything they possibly can, rather than hope that nothing will go wrong. After all, that's what got people paranoid about Nuclear energy to begin with. Many accidents, and many deaths.
As someone who did Atomic Physics at University, I know the Nuclear community like to down play the danger involved. (And those opposed like to pretend that any form of nuclear use is evil - hope they never get X-Rays).
A more balanced view might have helped to keep things in perspective, but the article is written by someone who sounds like they want to play with dynamite and aren't allowed to.
I am sure a safe nuclear reactor can be built one day, but to this day I haven't heard of any being built. (The pebble bad reactors do not have the squeaky clean record some people make them out to have. Such as the incident at Hamm-Uentrop West Germany nine days after the Chernobyl accident. On May 4 1986, a pebble became lodged in a feeder tube. Operators subsequently caused damage to the fuel during attempts to free the pebble. Radiation was released to the environs. The West German government closed down the research program because they found the reactor design unsafe).
In the case of this rocket, my immediate concerns are Human error & Programming error (such as a missing comma in the Arianne 5 Rocket Failure). In the right place, a programming error which shuts down all systems during flight could cause these mobile nuclear devices to plummet to earth. (It's happened on planes before
I know the article is talking about them lifting off from the middle of the Pacific
Also, if these rockets are so safe, why are they not building reactors based on their design to use on earth? Keeping the nuclear engine in a remote place on earth sounds a better idea than having one roaming the orbi
I have four PC's at present. They all shipped with some form of MS product on them.
... depends what I am trying out at the time. I havea multitude of OS's to run on it).
:-)]
My latest runs XP.
My previous ran NT, but I changed to RedHat Linux 9.
The previous one to that ran NT too, but now runs whatever I chuck on there (sometimes Mandrake, sometimes other free distros
The oldest machine runs Win98.
The Intel machines I owned before this either came with Win3.0, Win NT, or MS DOS, and all at some time were removed to run Red Hat in some shape or form.
So, 50% of my machines have had MS OS's replaced with other OS's. And 100% of my previous Intel machines all had MS OS's removed to run something else. I bet the report doesn't take that into account. It's very biased into thinking everyone wants MS OS's and doesn't take into account that some of us swapped out MS products to run Linux or other OS's. I am not the only person I know who has done this either.
The only two machines I ever bought which didn't come with MS OS's on them, were my old Vic20 and Commodore64. [Which might show my age!
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai.
The Pope is reminded that the Church cannot have another "Galileo incident," science's first "martyr." Galileo presented his correct heliocentric views to the Church, and the Church clung onto dogmatic tradition -- incorrect scientific views.
... those who look for the answer to the wrong question in the wrong place you will always get wrong opinions.
Also note, it was Copernicus's heliocentric view that Galileo was presenting. Copernicus was an Orthodox Monk - so the Orthodox church at the time did not have a problem with the 'Heliocentric' view of the Universe. It was Catholic Doctrine and not the Bible which stated that the sun went around the Earth.
Galileo refered to himself as being a Copernican when stating his belief. The Catholic Churches beliefs at the time, were not based on the Bible, but upon the teachings of Aristole and Ptolomy. All part of the 'Renaisance' as the 're-birth' of knowledge once lost was re-found by the Western-world.
Another thing to note, was that the writing which Galileo used to present his view was in the form of two people having a discussion. He made the mistake of using something the Pope had said to him in a discussion as part of the arguement of the 'Sun revolves around the Earth' view. The character making the arguement was given an name equivalent of 'Ignoramus'. Something the Pope and Catholic Church at the time considered rather insulting. {And wouldn't we all if our words were put in the mouth of an ignoramus and used against us.}
Even Fundamentalism is a relatively new thing to the Church.
I am glad you posted what you did, it was nice to see this expressed in this forum. It is something I have a hard time getting across to both athiests and Christians alike (and anyone else). As I always try to tell them, Science is about HOW the earth was made, the Bible is about WHO made the earth. Both are answering two totally different questions
Those who choose to believe or not believe the bibles teachings are free to do so.
Nani mo hoshii mono ga nai
"So, maybe the article tells more than the blurb, but it would appear to me that the reason that XP crashes more is that the people who are running it could be partly at fault (ie worms, trojans, poor hardware choices with outdated drivers)."
... .nothing else.
Maybe you just haven't hit the bugs in XP. My XP crashes quite often. I have no trojans, no worms or any such thing on my machine, I run anti-virus software and have a firewall. I don't play around with the registeres or anything. I also have all the up to date drivers for everything, and I have the best hardware which was available. SO blaming the user is a cop out, when the OS has known bugs. All you need to do is do something which will cause the OS to hit that bug, and you'll get your machine to freeze.
I have to admit though, it has a lot less problems than when I was using Win95 and Win98.
Remember, Win95 shipped with half a million known bugs. Well, when I first tried loading it on my old machine, I must have hit one of those, because first time it ran, it told me to shutdown everything because there was a problem. When I phoned Microsoft, they first tried to blame me saying it had illegal software on the machine
Nope, only Win95 .
Oh, then you've got a virus.
You ship Win95 with viruses in it?
Then it's your hardware, Win95 can only run on the most expensive hardware, you have to go and buy a better machine.
WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!
Needless to say, when I eventually ran Linux on my old machine, it never crashed. So what does that say about the hardware on my machine? Win95 can't cope, but Linux can easily?
In fact, the first machine I ran Linux on, only crashed once and that ws after I had run it for four years.
I got over the problems with Win95 always crashing every time I used the machine when I eventually upgraded to Win98. It only crashed occassionally, but always at inappropriate moments. If the hardware really was the problem, then Win98 wouldn't have solved the issues because the hardware was getting older, and the drivers would have been more out of date. The Microsoft help desk couldn't fix the Win95 problem, eventually conceding that everything was set up correctly, and that I had hit some bug in the OS.
XP has operated far better than either of the old WIn95 and Win98, but my two Linux machines have run rings around them and the XP machine in terms of stability.
Of course, it's a matter of horses for courses. I have the Win machines (XP and 98 at present) because I need them for all things WIn related, and I have the Linux machines for all things Linux related.
Just because you haven't hit a known bug, isn't a good enough reason to blame the user, or the users hardware.
Jusr my two cents worth.
Cheers.
Mainichi onaji kotono kurikaeshi.
" I just spent a half an hour trying to find Moe's...
:)"
:-)
... other than University Students?
:-)
For those interested, it's in between 'Springfild Town Hall' and 'Springfild Junior High School'.
Of course it is. Close enough to keep politicians circulatory systems functioning, and near enough to catch those teens with fake ID's valuable disposable income.
Can you think of two more needy groups
p.s. It's spelt SpringfiEld with an E.
Mainichi onaji kotono kurikaeshi.
" Or, say I read 10 studies on how many shooting deaths there are in a year in various nations. For Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia, the UK, etc. I chose the lowest number out of all 10, and for the USA, I chose the highest number. All the numbers are "Facts" but its ethically wrong to pick and chose different studies."
... so much happening on SlashDot concerning this. :-)
Most places I have read where they quote STATISTICS on shooting deaths, they do NOT use studies. They use the figures from each nations Bureau of Statistics which keep accurate records of Shooting deaths and wounded each year. Governemnts are good like that. If you are going around reading STUDIES, I'd like to know who is doing these studies, when the facts are KNOWN and easy to get hold off from each Government.
Everytime I've seen the statistics of people shot per capita compared to people who own guns, the same thing becomes relevant. The greater the percentage of gun ownership in society, the greater percentage chance of people who get shot by guns.
As for people exagerating to make a point, I saw four months of propaganda by Bush, Blair and Howard before the war, with the media having a distinct slant towards the war (good for ratings probably), and a distinct lack of coverage of the Anti-war rallies. With little or no coverage of actual facts.
Moore probably thinks he is helping by exagerating towards the liberal views in his documentaries in order to counteract the obvious slant most of the media of the world have towards conservatives. After all, the media is run by rich men who want to remain rich by keeping conservatives in power who they can make even more money and get more power.
Meanwhile in Japan, the US has convinced Koizumi and others to change the Japanese constitution. The constitution at present doesn't allow Japan to declare war on any one who does not attack them. This was put into their constitution to stop a repeat of Peral Harbour and the like. Now that Japan wants a seat on the UN Security Council, Colin Powell has told them they MUST change their constitution so they CAN declare war on other nations.
Most Japanese think this is a step backwards from their Anti-war stance. The lawmakers in Japan though are hoping Koizumi will get it throough, as they want that seat on the Security Council.
How nice it would have been to have had a nation who had turned it's back on war on the Security Council in order to make sure ALL diplomatic means had been tried before a declaration by the UN to take out another country.
But, I digressed from the original intent of my post
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai
"... variety is, after all, the spice of life"
... INTRODUCING, THE STAR TREK VARIETY HOUR!
Wow, just the idea Bermans been looking for to stop Voyager being the suckiest ST of them all
Watch Captain Picard Dance!
Listen to T'Pol sing!
Split your sides, Laughing yourself silly as Janeway and Dax tech the New Data about Human relations in many an hilarious skit!
You'd be a Feregni to miss it! (Show contains 20% new Star Trek Material)
I'm Troy McClure, wishing you happy viewing.
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai
I don't know what country you're from, but around here, multimillionaire corporate executives are not in the habit of buying groceries at the corner store, shopping with the plebeians at Wal-Mart, or hunkering down in a common park. They buy foreign cars, shop at expensive boutiques, and summer in Europe. In short, they very much tend to horde the majority of their money, and spend the rest of it in highly rarefied set of shops that mostly allow their wealth to circulate amongst their fellow millionaires.
... I am assuming you are from Japan from your name), and in most countries of the world, actually live very normal lives compared with the rest of us. [ie not much different to us]
5 ?nn20040817f1.htm
... Rich people.
.. because the main emphasis is on the 'TRICK'. If the lower and middle class people think eventually they will get a piece of the pie, they will not stop it happening ... thus putting themselves out of work.
Actually, Senjutsu, it is worse than you think. Most Millionaires (in Japan
Refer to article in the Japan Times. English versionfor our US, English, Aussie, NZ friends etc.
Millionaires don't live up to glamorous image
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl
What this really means, is more money in the pockets of Nike exec's who will then use it in their investment portfolios investing in more companies who are moving jobs OS, and doing the Lower to Middle class of the First World out of their jobs, while 3rd world workers slave away in sweat shops under pretty bad conditions.
The only winners out of this
So, you are correct in the fact that the 'trickle-down' theory doesn't work
The real trick is to try to get 3rd world working conditions up to the same standard as 1st world conditions. Then countries can compete on a more even footing, as the labour conditions will be the same, the cost will eventually even out (EVENTUALLY), and the real competition will take place in building a better product. (With the exception of numerous marketing tricks to make you assume you are buying a better product).
In the meantime, more of us will become unemployed, and the only trickling will be the rich b@$t@rd$ trickling on us!
I hate those golden showers. lol
Cheers,
Dabido
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai
I'm willing to bet that they're really aliens created by future guy to slow down human development! So, they aren't aliens invented by Comic book guy then? Watashi ha Niigata ben ga hanasemasen.
Alright, now a whole new generation can get frustrated and give up on this game before making it a tenth of the way through.
The new generation will go to a cheat site, get all the info on what they need to do to get through it. Then finish it before we can work out the Bistromathics of how it's done.
Only way to stop them is to play a Snooglehoort at them, in the hope they will run away, or get the Circling Poets of Arium to throw stones at them.
Mainichi onaji koto no kuri kaeshi.
WE NEED MORE GEEKS IN MANAGEMENT
... and some accountant thought it would save money to send them via the internet which actualyl costs us fees to up-load and down-load what they wanted to send. No matter how many times we tried to tell management it was MORE EXPENSIVE to send stuff over the internet, they refused to believe it cost money, because they thought the internet was some big Free thing that everyone on the planet could connect to without cost.
.. but do you think management would take the root password off tem after that? Nope!
:-)
The only manager I worked under who was any good, the provebial "enlightened manager", had risen from the geek ranks. However, he was pretty much trained to be a good manager. He had previously worked for EDS who invested a heap of cash in his management training, and it really paid off.
Other managers I know who rose up from the geek ranks, usually lack the people skills to actually be effective managers. Quite often they think they know technology so well, that they also can't see past their own ego.
The worst IT managers though, were the ones who had no idea about technology, and constantly made major faux pas almost every day due to their lack of understanding of what was realy needed. Their interpersonal skills also deteriorated. When they first start in IT management, they have the people skills, but as their stupid ideas get more and more resistance, they begin to feel that there is some sort of mutiny on and become rigid dictators who threaten people with sackings if they do not perform their stupid requests.
I've seen these sorts of managers ruin entire IT departments. Especially if they have come from accounting backgrounds, where they only care about the bottom line, and ignore people and good work practices in order to get things done.
The last place I worked, they removed the IT manager who had come from a geek background, because he opposed them for attempting illegal shortcuts (like removing security). He was replaced by an accountant who used to demand the other managers be 'yes men' to whatever ideas were past down from above.
The last straw for me was when they asked me to set it up so that they could send scanned checks with peoples bank details across the internet UNENCRYPTED. Quite illegal, and quite stoooopid. It resulted in a nasty battle with lawyers and HR involved, and the company was forced to give in.
This was in spite of the fact, that we had a private WAN which sent those scanned checks for free
So, it would be nice to see more geeks get into management, but only after they have had extensive traininh in managing people OR if they grab the manager from outside of IT, they need to ensure they get a good understanding of what IT is, and how it works.
Another good example of where non-IT managers fell down, was when I was a System Admin. Manaement insisted I give the root password to two guys who didn't need it, just because they convinced management that they couldn't do their jobs without it. Management couldn't explain to me why these guys couldn't do their jobs without it, but I still had to inform them whenever I changed the root password, or else I was going to get sacked. I was so glad whenI moved positions, because the security for those machines was impossible. One of those idiots blew away the i-node to the password file when he was trying to hack peoples passwords. The idiot. That was a tough day for me
Just my two cents worth.
Mainichi onaji kotono kurikaeshi.
I think you hit the nail on the head with this post.
:-)
People should stop the argueing and let Kevin make his films. Those who are fans can go see the movies, those who are not, can avoid them.
A simple solution for simple people.
Mainichi onaji kotono kurikaeshi.
It's cool. That's why I started the last post with ROFL. No offense was taken. :-)
:-)
I thought you were just rehashing a common myth that networking was as easy as plugging two computers together.
We had one of the PC support people worked with us once for a month on some cross training. (ie we taught him some about what we actually did). He used to put us down before he did the training. After that, he admitted it was a hard job, and he was actually helpful for about three months before falling back into his old ways.
Cheers.
Hopefully in IT all those "I want $80k for being able to plug two computers together" networking people will get weeded out.
... but hey, that's what the inferno of torment (IT) is all about. :-) Last place I was at wasn't paying me much more than $30K while one of the PC support guys was getting about $50 for sitting around all day. I could bore you with the war stories of what really happens in Networking, but you'd probably retaliate with semiconductor war stories. :-)
:-)
:-)
ROFL. I was a network engineer for 3.5 years. It's more difficult than it looks, and you get blamed for everything
The rest of the post was interesting.
Cheers and Thanks.
Dunlop have always been a good cheap shoe to buy. They haven't changed too much in price (except to go up a little in the last ten years), so cheap shoes are still there. I targeted Nike specifically because I know they use the sweathouses and the price doesn't reflect the cost of production. The savings are not passed on, their shoes did not come down. [And other brands followed Nike by increasing thier prices ... so shoes on average went up.]
... but still my point about the profit margin still stands.
:-)
Hmmm Okay, a slight fall of 2-5% in software
I wonder if the price of the software came down because of competition, rather than it being cheaper to make? If it was because it was cheaper to make, the consumer certainly didn't get the full 90% saving the company did.
If the software houses decide to follow Microsoft (like the majority of shoe manufacturers did with Nike), then they may UP their price later. [I know when the shoe manufacturers followed Nike's lead, their shoes were suddenly considered 'better quality' and trendy. I was told off for wearing Dunlops, whose shoes remained at a resonable price - as opposed to Rebok or Nike's whose shoes last just as long, but cost three to four times the price].
Getting back to the software though - When we outsourced a project to India, it cost us $900,000 as compared to $9 Million it was going to cost to develop in house. I know we didn't lower our price when selling it. If other software houses are making the same saving, by producing thier software for one-tenth the price in India, then the 2-5% reduction means they are still improving their profit a LOT.
But, like I said in the first post, 50% of the IT jobs were wiped out here, and only 10 to 15% of those people will get back into IT. It wasn't just the poor suckers who didn't know what they were doing that got axed too (though most of them were first to go). A lot of the good workers also lost their jobs, just simply because their jobs went OS.
Every now and then I hear stories that the markets will return one day, because I hear about mistakes from Indian companies. (The software we got them to write didn't work at all to begin with. We had to have them re-write it). But I can only see India improving and not seeing the market return.
But, I do work in a city which took a major blow in the IT sector and had the corporate offices move elsewhere in the country as well. So now we only have regional offices. This cities IT sector won't recover for a long time.
I still think it is false logic to think that one thing will follow another, just because it looks good. Shoes certainly didn't. Cheap shoes were always around, and probably always will be, but the market as a whole went UP and did not come down. [Not that I really want to have sweatshops set up here.]
But, the overall cost of manufacture of software has decreased a lot, and the price has reduced slightly. I doubt the bounce will occur to the IT industry which is expected, because the market is already saturated (and in a lot of cases with freeware which does the job).
But, that's just my two cents worth.
Thanks for the reply and the info.
Nani - mo hoshii mono ga nai!!!
It will play Space Muzak. All those grunge hits, now played on a yamaha organ. Nani-mo hoshii mono ga nai!!!
In the 1980's I read a book on building your own Electric car, which basically cost US$1000 at the time. In the late 80's (or was it early '90s) I remembered GM said they couldn't build an electric car for less than US$100,000, which made me laugh. They used it as an excuse for scraping an electric car they were planning on building. (The good old, "We tried, but we can't do it for your own good" excuse most companies give when they really don't want to do something).
... when I suggested to ppl that maybe the good old petrol station shoudl branch into hydrogen, they said it costs to much to install somewhere to store the hydrogen. How weird I thought, considering they had no problems when they wanted to sell LPG or needed to sell Unleaded Petrol.
Well, the other excuse I've heard about Hydrogen fueled cars, is there isn't anywhere to build places to buy hydrogen from
Personally, I am getting tired of car manufactureres, and petrol companies always finding excuses why we need to stick to petroleum based products when peopl ehave made alternative fueled vehicles for ages without the high costs or problems obtaining the fuel. It only becomes 'difficult' or 'a problem' when the current incumbants of the industry find they need to do something about it. Nanni-mo hoshii mono-ga nai!!!
Not that the octopus example helps me... octopus / octopuses. But now consider: Mouse / Mice? House / Houses?!? Hice! Foot / feet? Tooth / Teeth? Boot / boots?!? beet!
... Run and Ran come from the Germanic .. the middle letter changes acording to the tense (I run -present tense. I ran - past tense). But other things use the 'ed' suffix to show past tense. So if we follow your rule about chucking things which don't follow the normal rule, will we be sanging ranned in the future? I ranned away!
... for cow].
:-)
English is made from several different langauges. The plurals come from the languages we stole the word from. Considering their are CELTIC, GERMANIC, FRENCH, LATIN, GREEK and numerous other languges chucked into creating English, it is no wonder that our gramma is screwed. After all
As for the Octopuses and Octopii thing, as I recall, the English teachers used to correct people who used Octopuses. So becareful what you correct, unless you accidentaly sit on some cactuses and cactii while shearing some sheeps and sheep.
Next time you have a beef [old French for Cow], don't have a cow [Ancient CEltic from the word Coe
Ciao
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai
You're assuming that there are new products to be made which can be sold.
... and while we're all waiting for the jobs to pick-up ... they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
Software is already a saturated market. Besides, we have been outsourcing to India for almost a decade now, and I haven't seen software decrease in price at all, we are still charged the same or more while the fat cats who own the software companies have just inceased their profit.
Guess what, no new IT jods for anyone
But guess what, the management and support of some software has left he shores for India and the third world too. Which really only leaves a few IT jobs left, and they aren't being shared around. In this city, 50% of the IT professionals lost their jobs to outsourcing, and it hasn't picked up. I spoke to a guy recently at a job interview, and he told me the IT job agencies expect about 10-15% of those who lost their jobs will be able to get IT jobs again, and the other 85-90% will need to find jobs in other fields. [Don't ask me where the IT agencies get their figures from].
After all, this false logic which says the software prices will fall, is like expecting Nike prices to fall just because they are made for $1 in Indonesian and Thai sweathouse factories. Prices of shoes never came down, and I doubt prices of software will either. [Well, they haven't over the last 10 years that we've been outsourcing].
Guess where that leaves us IT geeks. Either looking for work in India or looking for work as manure shovellers as it's the only work left. So damn glad I study so hard at University to get a job shovelling manure!
I have no problems with people overseas making money, after all, those IT geeks in India studied hard too. But I do take exception to being lied to about what will happen. When I was at school in the 80's, they claimed IT was going to be the place to make a decent wage. I am still waiting for that to happen, but with the downturn in IT over the last few years, I doubt I will be in IT for much longer.
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai!!!
This seems like common sense. Shouldn't all network admins be doing this anyway?
... if it ever goes in.
... yes ... but what to do about management. [and if someone does hack in ... guess who would have got the blame!] I think most network people like to do these common sense security things ... it's management who blocks us, or refuses to allocate funds that are the real problem. [Just after I left the last place I worked, the Network Manager who took over ran the network with no firewall between the business LAN/WAN and the internet for two months. Is he dumb .. or is he just plain stooopid? Maybe he should run for President!]
As someone who has worked as both a Network Engineer and a System Administrator, I can tell you that Management and common sense do not go together. Many a time we asked for tools and software to help stop the hackers, but management refused under the grounds that they thought "security through obscurity" would work. They figured no one would hack into us. When we did testing and found holes in the security that script kiddies could waltz through, Management thought we were making the holes and told us not to test.
Easy solution is to buy the book and repeatedly beat management over the head with the thing till they understand that security is important and that "security through obscurity" doesn't work. But, management do have thick heads, and it might take a long time of beating before they get it into their brain
Common sense
Nani-mo hoshii mono-ga nai!!!!
Gostev said that the information on the attack could be found on "specialist web sites" although at the time of going to press the INQ couldn't find them.
I think the terrorists attacked their own sites - that's why they were down. So they were correct, part of the internet was taken down by them. Website no higeki!
I can't wait until your first person shooter stops and drinks a nice cold refreshing soda
Actually, I am tired of the games which have drink machines in them, but when you take your character over to hem, they won't let your character buy anything and drink it. Thirsty work shooting monsters. They should have something for the character to wet his whistle!
Nani-mo hoshii mono ga nai.
MS Word is the one piece of software made by MS that's actually worth something. OpenOffice doesn't hold a candle.
... but I doubt you'd listen because you obviously haven't used it much.
... costs me money, doesn't do what I want. Open Office ... Free, and does what I want. Why would I spend money on a program which only does half of what I need done, when I can get one for free which does do what I want? Maybe you should take yourself out of the tiny box you live in and recognise that there are other people in this world, and MS doesn't meets our needs.
It might be worth something, but it also costs money.
I assume you wrote this to make us all laugh. MS Word doesn't do everything which I need, where as Open Office can. Unless MS Word now allows you to convert documents into PDF format. (Which I do with either Open Office or Latex) Also, unless it allows me to send documents to Linux users as well as Windows users, it is quite useless. Of course, I havn't seen MS Word for Linux, where as most people I know use either Open Office on Windows or Linux. Even if someone I know has only MS Word, guess what, Open Office lets me convert it to a format they can read. I could keep writing about the things Open Office does
Let's also compare the value for money side too. Hmmm, MS Word
So, where are you holding that candle now?
Dabido
Osaka ben ga wakara hen
NASA are a bit late then. Queensland University already successfully tested a Scramjet on a missle in 2002. http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2002/s635772.ht m
Or the first one in 2001 which crashed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1626448.stm
Or the latest one in May 18 2004:
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,959349 0%255E15306,00.html
Note that the firt successful ground test of a SCRAMJET was done in 1991 by Queensland University. NASA has also done tests on missles.
Even though the article may be doing the 'SCRAMJET AIRCRAFT' tests in simulation, a lot of the factual data has already been collected through actual test flights on rockets
etc. After all, isn't that one of the powers of computers, feed the data in ... simulate what will happen (to the best of the data's and programs ability).
Dabido
Osaka ben ga wakara hen.
This is directed at all the posts. Not just the one I am posting after. (Except to say that the link between Chronic Fatigue and Allergies has been known for years! Are you really a practicing allergist and didn't know that?)
.. which almost killed me.
.. provided I don't eat any pig, get stung by a bee .. or come into contact with anything else I react to).
As a person who suffers from allergies, I know that most people like to pretend we "people with allergies", have munchausens and write a lot of us off as "mental". I know this, because people have done nasty things to me, like tease me when I run away from bees. Last time I was stung by one, my younger brother got the sting out almost immediately, but I still had my neck swell up to twice it's normal size which caused respiratory problems. But people love to write me off as a "lunatic" when bees scare me.
Then there was the time one of my flatmates put seafood in my dinner to try to prove to me I was a hypocondriact
Another allergy includes pig meat causing me to go into anaphalactic shock.
Dispite having done numerous tests which prove I am allergic to the ones mentioned above, plus cats, grass, dust et al, people still think it's all MENTAL! I learned about my allergy to beer the hard way. Had four of them in a night (over about 6 hours); ended up in hospital unconscious from internal bleeding from the stomach. (No, I didn't have ulcers at the time). My friends all thought it was a neat trick and want me to repeat it for them one day.
So, are most of us MENTAL. I think not. Maybe we do over react a bit to some things. But when we know that "thing" has the potential to kill us, of course we will do whatever it takes to avoid them. In some cases, we avoid things which we aren't allergic to out of necessity. For instance, I am a vegetarian. Am I allergic to beef or lamb? Not as far as I know, but when people think nothing of substituting meats when one isn't available, I don't want to end up dead or in hospital just because the restaurant swapped a pork chop because the lamb chop was all used up. Or someone cooked a pork chop on the BBQ before they cooked my steak.
As for smells. Not sure about computer smells, but yeah, smells make me nausious. Normally anything carbon based like petroleum/carfumes and stuff. Some perfumes in soaps etc. In fact, most soaps give me a rash, so i use a special one. Bacon cooking makes me nausious and I sometimes vomit. Not sure why, as I never eat the stuff. To everyone else it's just a smell. They can write it off as hypocondria or munchausens, but guess what, tests at the RPA (Royal Prince Alfred Hospital)allergy unit have proven that I am allergic to these things.
When I did my allergy testing, I reacted to everything on the skin test. The Dr's put this down to the fact that I was so allergic to Cats, Grass, and dust that it caused my body to react to everything. [They were the three strongest reactions on the test].
Since living in a cat free environment, some of my sinus problems have cleared. (Just need to get rid of the dust and the grass in the world, and I can breath easy
After reading a lot of what other people have had to say about this, with MOST of us allergic people being "Mental" I have to disagree. Most I have met suffer from their allergies, and when people tease us about them, right us off as mental or whatever, it just shows an insensitivity towards our predicament.
Just imagine if something "normal" like food could kill you. Wouldn't you be extra cautious?
We are fortunate that we have the technology to see that certain substances do trigger our histamines and allergies now. One hundred years ago, I probably would have been dead by now. (Actually, I was lucky to survive the internal bleed from the beer. I took myself to the hospital and ten minutes after arriving my blood pressure dropped to zero [zero on the device attached to me. There must have s